Hullo Gavin,
I deliberately used neutral language to describe my experience with
political parties, as I wanted to be fair to a complex reality. But I know
just what you mean about the dirty side of politics.
I learnt about politics in the Joh Bjelke Petersen era, when I receive a
cabinet level transfer from an aboriginal community, unfortunately situated
on vast deposits of bauxite, where I was principal of the school. This was
one of only two 'political transfers' that year. I had an interesting few
months until the transfer was finally overturned following strong union
pressure on the minister. During this time I was reliably informed that my
mail was being monitored, and that my phone was probably bugged.
I discovered that politics is often intensely personal. I was able to find
out who was reporting on my activities to whom, and the links to cabinet and
the premier. It was also interesting that the second ranked person in the
education department who told me of my transfer, then asked me if I knew why
this was happening, as he clearly had not been informed. I eventually
collected some five or six quite different versions of the story of this
transfer, some almost laughable, others believable, but I will probably
never know the 'true' story. Shortly after this, I read a book by one of the
Medvedev brothers, famous Russian dissidents, and was struck by the
similarities in political practice in then communist Russia and supposedly
democratic Queensland. Interestingly, I was very well treated by my union,
and have nothing but praise for their handling of the affair.
This experience has made me very cynical of those who 'rabbit on' on this
forum about democratic values, and such like. For the most part these are
comfortable myths that keep the average person pacified. But step outside
the government's comfort zone and see how quickly the axe falls.
To return to your post. I know what you mean about social level moral
imperatives. I argued in an early essay on the forum that morality changes
as you proceed up the hierarchy of Pirsig's levels, and that a sense of
injustice fuels social level morality. I have been strongly influenced by
injustice against , for example, Mandela, but it took much longer to realise
the extent of injustice within my own society.
I was interested by your final comment, where you said
"on a mystic level all that we perceive is us - tat tvam asi. the mystic
level reinforces the connection between self and world and it aslo kind of
severs it - if you know what i mean. the whole bodhisattva thing is about
this maybe."
This is just the point that I am struggling with. I think it does sever it.
The people and causes that I have loved are suddenly seen differently. In a
sense they die. What I had seen previously is now revealed as fantasy. The
new reality is undoubtedly a 'better' thing, but the old judgements and
views must go. This is the issue that caused Pirsig to 'give up' after ten
years at Benares Hindu University. I can't imagine this was a small thing at
the time. But he could not accept the enlightened view of Hiroshima could be
so at odds with his social/intellectual morality. He was unable to make the
transition then, so giving up became the best solution. I find myself at a
rather similar place, though my experience is deeply influenced by Gestalt
practice, and I might be able to get through what seems a rather 'immoral'
impasse. Time will tell.
Good to chat with you.
Regards,
John B
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:12 BST